Readers respond to PCUSA’s committee
on civil union and Christian marriage (updated 8/17)
August 17, 2009
PCUSA committee seeks input
from members on the marriage debate
Session writes committee: God’s Word clear on marriage
Posted Monday, August 17, 2009
To the General Assembly’s Committee on Civil Union and Marriage:
We are saddened that the PCUSA has brought questions of theological change into our local congregations. We believe that the question of same-sex unions is just a “flash point,” avoiding the larger and more important question of how we view and interpret Scripture. The discussions and votes regarding same-sex unions seem inconsistent with the Church’s stance, as reflected in all the previous and most recent ordination votes, clear Biblical teaching and 2,000 years of church history. This appears to be an attempt to undermine clear Biblical teaching in the area of sexuality.
As a result, we desire to reaffirm the following:
- Scripture is abundantly clear in teaching us that sexual expression is a gift from God, not an entitlement and should only be expressed in the covenant of marriage between husband and wife.
- For 2,000 years, the Church has consistently taught that marriage is between one man and one woman.
- The current position of the PCUSA is that homosexual behavior is a sin.
- Any expression of sexuality outside of marriage creates societal chaos:
- Sexually transmitted diseases
- Divorce and broken families
- Unwanted pregnancies
- One parent families
- Wounded children
- Lives torn apart with emotional baggage
In light of the clear teaching of Scripture and the denomination’s current position regarding homosexual behavior, it seems inconsistent to engage in discussions concerning same-sex unions.
Hebrews 13:4 tells us that marriage should be honored by all and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
Jesus tells us in Matthew 19:4-6 “Haven’t you read,” He replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”
From the holiness code, we read in Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
Romans 1:26-27 tells us “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
Romans 1:32 further states, “Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”
We believe that the Presbyterian Church was a driving conscience for our nation as it emerged, guiding the church and nation with God and the Bible as its source. We believe that the church should be a moral compass of a nation, not an organization that is swayed by the cultural shifts. We believe that God’s word is clear on its definition of marriage and we should stand firm on the solid rock of God’s word. “The grass withers, a flower fades; but the word of our God shall stand forever!”
Your Servants in Christ,
The Session of First Presbyterian Church, Hanford, Calif.
Ron Edmonds, Martin Keast, Jared Lehner, Greg Connelly, Dan Piper, David Groves, Janice Mills, Louise Wade, Harry Wibeto, Jeff Jones, J.R. Infante, Sheryl McCarty, Kathy Prewitt, Debra Revious, Beryl Yates
Advocate for the recognition of covenanted same-gender partnerships
Posted Monday, August 17, 2009
Dear Committee Members:
I was happy to hear that the General Assembly Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage is asking the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community.
It is a question that has been close to my heart and mind over the past years, and I would like to share what little grace I have found. I have struggled with the issue, not because it is particularly complex or personal, but because people I respect come down passionately on both sides.
The question of what is marriage and what is its place in the Christian community should not be dismissed with a trivially simple response. Nor should the sincerity of those with opposing views be flippantly dismissed. While I believe the Bible unequivocally calls for the full inclusion and participation of all people, regardless of sexual orientation, others strongly disagree. (Ironically, both sides accuse the other of abandoning Scriptural teaching to enforce some political or social norm). I hope that we can disagree without demeaning the faith or sincerity of those on the other side.
What is the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community? I think it is helpful to ask instead, what is the place of BGLT people in the church? While we have no authority to retract or extend the grace of the Gospel, we have the ability to make others feel welcome or unwelcome. And we can open our communities to others, regardless of where they are coming from – or we first can demand that they remake themselves in our image before being fully included.
As such, I would urge three things. Firstly, listen to those we disagree with. It is easy to insist on the theological prohibition of something we have no interest in to begin with. For perspective, we need to listen to those who want the church to recognize and covenant their same-gender partnerships. If the church decides to continue denying same-sex, covenanted relationships, who bears the cost? My relationship with my wife is, perhaps, the greatest joy in my life. I lack the hubris to demand somebody else deny a similar relationship with their partner in order to be fully included in the church community. Do we fully understand the cost of continued discrimination?
Secondly, recognize that there are people of faith on both sides of the issue. Pretending that one side or the other is insufficiently committed to following Jesus helps nobody.
Thirdly, the committee should advocate for the recognition of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. I am quite persuaded that that this is the morally and Scripturally sound approach. I am also aware that others strongly disagree. So I wonder, what happens if we get it wrong?
In both cases, we’re unable to change what covenants God recognizes. Whether we deny relationships God has covenanted or covenant relationships God has not, God will remain faithful to us. Similarly, if the church is wrong on a doctrinal matter, this will only add one more issue to the long list of errors the church has made. And, with time and grace, we will correct the error.
But wrongly refusing to recognize same-sex covenanted relationships would compromise our ability to spread the Gospel. We can say that everybody is welcome in our churches. I would not feel welcome or included in a church that refused to recognize my marriage. Why would others
?
This is the hottest week of the summer for Michigan – and as the temperature climbs in my un-air conditioned study, I cannot help but think of Jonah’s anger at God when the vine that had shaded him for a day wilted and died. When we are confident in our own righteousness, it is easy to lose perspective. It is easy to forget that God extends his love to everybody – even those we have not welcomed into our hearts and our communities. Let us not be as Jonah, so focused on our own prejudices and our own comforts that we miss what God is doing around us or ignore what God has called us to do.
May God bless you and guide you in your deliberations,
Daniel Bahls
Northside Presbyterian Church, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Deliberations must include meaningful, deep conversations with same-sex couples
Posted Monday, August 17, 2009
Dear Committee Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to express our thoughts on the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. For over 30 years the PCUSA has been wrestling with questions related to sexuality and sexual orientation. Unfortunately for much of this long history, these conversations have been about “the issue,” not people. Equally unfortunate is that many of these conversations have been about LGBT people, and not with LGBT people. So, it is certainly worth celebrating that a committee of the PCUSA is actively seeking input from people who are actually affected by its deliberations: the LGBT members of our denomination.
We were married Sept. 15, 2001 at Northside Presbyterian Church in Ann Arbor, Mich. It was a beautiful early fall day and we were blessed to see our sanctuary filled to overflowing with family, friends and nearly every member of our congregation. We sang hymns, read Scripture, and heard a homily from the pastor. We shared communion and exchanged vows and rings. It was in every way a perfect day and every moment of that day illustrated how God has showered us with His many blessings. After we exchanged vows, the assembled witnesses made this their vow to us: “We vow to nurture Brian and Alan in their life together. We promise to support and guide them by word and deed with love, strength, honesty and humor.” Since that day, that promise made in words has been fulfilled by deeds as our family, our friends and our congregation have continued to support and nurture us as individuals and in our married life together.
At the same time, we support and nurture our church. We serve on committees and session. We sing in the choir, preach, teach and most importantly pray for Northside. The love and support we share with each other in our marriage is a model of the mutual love and support that we show our community of faith, and that the community, in turn, shows for us.
None of which is any different from the marriages of anyone else in our congregation.
Unlike those marriages, however, ours was made to be a source of contention. A serial litigator whom none of us have ever met accused our pastor of wrongdoing for officiating at our ceremony, and even for ordaining one of us. Although the accusation was not sustained, the Investigating Committee formed by the presbytery to handle this matter never took the opportunity to meet with us, despite our offers to do so, instead demanding copies of the order of worship for our wedding, presumably to determine whether the contents of our heads or hearts conformed to proper Presbyterian polity. We politely declined of course, instead offering to talk with them. They never even acknowledged our offer.
Sometimes it seems as if the promises and responsibilities of the “connectional church” go only one way. We serve on national PCUSA boards, have often served as elder commissioners to the Presbytery of Detroit, have served on the Presbytery PJC, and have served as overture advocates and elder commissioners to General Assembly, and we pray for the PCUSA continually. And for this, we are repaid with litigation. Fortunately for the PCUSA ours is a covenant, so even when the PCUSA ignores its responsibilities, the two of us maintain our commitment.
You asked for thoughts on “covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community” but the place of marriage in the Christian community is not different based on sexual orientation. In the PCUSA we do not have gay baptisms and straight baptisms, for “we confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins” as our Book of Confessions reminds us. Nor do we celebrate gay communion and straight communion. Of course there is no reason why we should segregate our sacraments, for it is the same God who blesses us all. If we do not segregate our sacraments, why should we needlessly segregate our liturgies? Our “place in the Christian community” as two married gay men is no different than anyone else’s place in the Christian community. Our responsibilities are the same. Our sorrows and our joys are the same. Our love is the same. So, the distinction that is being made makes no sense. Any answer one could give regarding the place of marriage in the Christian community applies to us as much as it applies to anyone else.
You have agreed to serve on a committee that will study the marriages of a group of people, most of whom you have probably never met. You have been asked to provide marriage guidance to LGBT people based only on their sexual orientation. At the same time you have been asked to provide guidance to the PCUSA about LGBT people, also based on nothing more than one aspect of their lives: their sexual orientation. Think on this brothers and sisters in Christ: real human beings, created in the imago Dei, reduced to a distinction and a category. You are being asked to make separations where none exist, and being asked to study distinctions that are not real in any meaningful way. Do not make needless divisions, for as Paul told the church in Galatia, “for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:26-28)
As far as we know, we do not know any members of your committee. Yet you, a group of complete strangers, are being asked for your opinion on our wedding ceremony that you did not attend, our marriage that you have never witnessed, between the two of us, whom you have never met. Trying to do such a thing in a pastoral way, not only for the two of us, but for the whole denomination will be difficult, if not impossible. We do not envy you this task, but we thank you for your service.
We know first-hand the feeling of being “talked about” instead of “talked with.” This church simply must recognize that same-sex couples are not asking for permission to be part of the church. We are already here, and have been serving, praying, and witnessing alongside, to, and with the rest of the church. If your deliberations do not include meaningful and deep conversations with same-sex couples from across our denomination, your work will miss the essential notion of equality that is central to our Presbyterian faith.
Yet you also have the opportunity to speak to the denomination, to remind us all of the proper place of all marriages in the Christian community: not as an idol or a fetish, not as a method of gate-keeping, not as an opportunity to unnecessarily meddle in the lives of total strangers using the “communal church” as an excuse, not even as a sacrament, but as a symbol and a means of mutual support, nurture, encouragement, and love, just as Christ loves His church.
As you continue your deliberations we urge you to remember our Presbyterian theology of marriage, as our Quaker brothers and sisters so eleg
antly put it recently: “Marriage is the Lord’s work and we are but witnesses.” On September 15, 2001, we were married before a great cloud of witnesses, yet it was the Lord’s work.
Our marriage continues to be the Lord’s work. That is the place of marriage in Christian community. May God bless you richly as you continue your deliberations,
Alan L. Kiste, elder and Brian W. Spolarich, elder
Northside Presbyterian Church, Ann Arbor, Mich.
If PCUSA blesses same-sex unions and marriages, we will grieve our Father
Posted Monday, August 17, 2009
To: Civil Union and Christian Marriage Committee
Thank you for this opportunity to share concerns and have a voice about civil unions and Christian marriage. Watching the tragic, heart breaking decline of our beloved PCUSA has been, and is, very hard. But hope is not entirely dead for me (a lifelong member approaching her 80s) because I know the power of prayer, and I know God can open eyes that have been blinded if He so chooses. However, hope is wavering because who knows if it is His plan to revive a denomination which has strayed so far from honoring the authority of His Word. He may let us go because He has so many other faithful and powerful church bodies (not necessarily mainline denominations) which are standing firm, speaking and preaching the whole truth … the whole Gospel.
So much “good stuff” has already been written – over and over – that I hope my words will not be futile; but, Jesus said, “You shall be my witnesses.” I’m in total agreement with the beautiful thoughts and truths in the letter written by Carmen Fowler and Stephen Brown of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. Though I would like to, I won’t repeat what they have said but will add a few thoughts heavy on my heart.
Isn’t the first priority in our mission to glorify God, enjoy Him forever and to make His goodness and love known all over the world? If we condone and bless same-sex marriage, we are robbing God of His glory! Instead of glorifying Him, we are a hindrance to His glory and a stumbling block to many! Those precious people deceived into same-sex relationships would lose out totally, not having the chance to know the joy and the fruit of repentance and forgiveness, and ultimately the joy of Jesus. Dare we have a part in this?
Jesus had much to say about being a stumbling block. (A quick look in a good concordance will show you how many times!) One of these warnings which spoke loudly to me is Luke 12:52. Jesus said, “Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.” NIV study notes on this verse say: “How did the law experts take away the key to Knowledge? Through their erroneous interpretation of Scripture and their man-made rules, they made God’s rules hard to understand and practice. Caught up in a religion of their own making, they could no longer lead the people to God. They closed the door of God’s love to the people and had thrown away the key.”
I believe that so much deception has crept into PCUSA and most of us are unaware of it because of lack of belief in the reality of Satan … and this is so tragic! Jesus warned repeatedly about the evil one, the deceiver, (25 times in the Gospels) so, why in the world don’t we take this seriously?
I believe that our own beloved men and women, boys and girls caught up in same-sex relations are deceived, and that they can be set gloriously free by the power of our Lord. We have the responsibility to help set them free. We’ve all heard … over and over …, “It’s not loving to deny any rights to these brothers and sisters.” How sad that we are deceived about, of all things, God’s love! Is it not loving for a father to protect his children by giving them boundaries, rules, guidance and, yes commands, like, “Don’t do this or you will be hurt!” which says to us, “I love you and don’t want you to be hurt!”
God does not forbid sexual sin (heterosexual or homosexual) just to be difficult. He knows its power to destroy us physically and spiritually. We best not underestimate the power of sexual sin. It has devastated countless lives, destroyed families, hurt churches and communities and has even destroyed nations. We must wake up and realize the peril in deception and lack of knowledge. Our sin may not be intentional but nevertheless, is sin in God’s eyes.
If PCUSA condones and blesses same sex unions and marriages, we are deep into sin, grieving our Father and wounding our fellow man. God has redeemed us for a new life and we would rob our brothers and sisters of this awesome blessing. More tragically, we would call into question the enabling power of our Precious Lord who died to save us and empower us to live holy, Christ-like lives. May we all pray fervently for our Church.
Anne K. Ervin
First Presbyterian Church, Morganton, N.C.
Have we become hollow voices?
Posted Friday, August 14, 2009
To: Civil Union and Christian Marriage Committee, Office of the General Assembly
I support laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and I affirm the sanctity of the marriage covenant that is expressed in love, mutual support, personal commitment and shared fidelity between a man and a woman. Therefore, on this matter, I call upon the Presbyterian Church (USA) to sustain its paralleling, Biblically grounded, constitution and doctrine.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “The Presbyterian clergy are the loudest, the most intolerant of all sects; the most tyrannical and ambitious; ready at the word of the lawgiver, if such a word could now be obtained, to put the torch to the pile, and to rekindle in this virgin hemisphere the flames in which their oracle, Calvin, consumed the poor Servetus, because he could not subscribe to the proposition of Calvin, that magistrates have a right to exterminate all heretics to the Calvinistic creed. They pant to reestablish, by law, that holy inquisition, which they can now only infuse into public opinion.”
Today, would Thomas Jefferson be shocked that we Presbyterians have not taken a national leadership role in forming the debate in favor of our longstanding doctrine in defining marriage? I think so! Would John Calvin be a casual observer in this new century fracturing debate on the issue of same-sex marriage? I think not! Have we allowed ourselves to become hollow voices? It seems as though we have!
On April 18, 2005, the day before his election to the papacy, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger delivered the following message:
“How many winds of doctrine have we known in recent decades, how many ideological currents, how many ways of thinking? The small boat of the thought of many Christians has often been tossed about by these waves – flung from one extreme to another… Every day new [deviations] spring up, and what St Paul says about human deception and the trickery that strives to entice people into error [Eph 4:14] comes true.
“Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be ‘tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine,’ seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.
“We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An ‘adult’ faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is
this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth.
“We must develop this adult faith; we must guide the flock of Christ to this faith. And it is this faith – only faith – that creates unity and is fulfilled in love.”
Our love of the person – the gay sibling – is “adult faith”; the type of faith we should expect to find in our church. On issues of doctrine, however, this same “adult faith” means that we must not allow the “dictatorship of moral relativism” to rock our boat.
Thank you for your consideration of my position.
Steven C. Robinson
First Presbyterian Church, Hanford, Calif.
A secular approach to same-sex marriage debate
Posted Friday, August 14, 2009
Dear Committee members,
I thank you for the opportunity to address you on the question of the recognition of same-sex marriage. It is indeed so rare that anyone in the PCUSA actually solicits opinions from church members that I will suspend my usual cynicism about this church as I write.
I expect many will address you on the religious implications of such a step. I would like, by contrast, to consider mainly the secular consequences. I know there is the temptation to separate the two, to recognize the civil right of same sex couples to marry while holding back on the ecclesiastical role. Yes, there is the human desire to be tolerant, to encourage living in commitment, to include those who claim to be disenfranchised.
It is important to remember, however, that marriage is an institution that embraces all cultures and all major religions and has been understood to be a complementary union between opposite sexes from the dawn of civilization (I am not an anthropologist, but I can say this with some conviction). There have been polygamous marriages, dynastic marriages, arranged marriages and marriages for love, but the two constants have been the concept of commitment and the sexual union of male and female. It is a definition rooted in biology. Is it wise or healthy to deface language by altering such a definition? (And replace it with, what: “opposite-sex marriage”?)
The new proposed definition would now become “the committed union of two individuals who are having sexual relations.” We are now dispensing with the timeless complementary biological definition in exchange for the mere privileging of those who are engaged in sexual relations. Have you considered how arbitrary and discriminatory that is? What of those who are celibate? What, then, of committed people who are not engaging in sex? What of elderly siblings who live together, as many do? What of cousins and other relatives who live as extended family? They have some rights of next-of-kin and inheritance, but as adults they also lack the privileges of shared health insurance or tax benefits.
What of friends who are committed to sharing lives and households? And what, perchance, of a gay couple living in a long partnership who, in a renewed, transformative faith commitment (to the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist religion – this is so universal, it matters not) have resolved to forgo sexual relations, but still live in love and commitment, in a shared household with shared finances? They would likely not characterize their now-deep friendship as “marriage” and would thus lose out on the health insurance, inheritance, visitation rights, etc., that you would give to their counterparts who engage in sexual activity, the very activity that is considered sinful by many cultures and religions. As Christians, ask yourselves whether this legal discrimination is not placing a stumbling block in front of one who wants to live in obedience.
Worse yet, the proposed same-sex marriage definition has come to us arbitrarily and unilaterally by a determined interest group that labels anyone who disagrees “a bigot.” Have you ever encountered a sober discussion by legislators, judges or editorial writers of the issues I mention here? Please ask yourselves if you are further enabling this thuggery that now includes even the mainstream media (The New York Times and Newsweek are examples that come to mind here).
Marriage is a good thing, to be preserved unapologetically in its age-old understanding. Elsewhere, however, we need remember that love and commitment come in many forms, that there are such things as “alternative families” and “civil – not necessarily sexual – unions” that should be supported, even encouraged. It is less a question of absolute “rights” than a searching for the common good. Economics have to come in to play when one alters the tax code, and, whether we like it or not, we have to admit that much of it centers on the matter of health care reform. These compromises and weighing of consequences are what legislatures are for.
Governments can explore this in an inclusive way that is neutral about sexuality and is based on commitment rather than romantic love. Such an approach would please Libertarians who feel that “government should stay out of the bedroom” and at the same time would respect the religious communities who care not to see sin rewarded and faithfulness discriminated against. This, I believe is what our President means when he urges us to find common ground on issues that divide us.
Yours sincerely,
Mariam Touba
Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church, New York City
Our tradition is clear that homosexual practice
is outside the bounds of God’s will
Posted Thursday, Aug. 6, 2009
Dear Civil Union and Christian Marriage Committee,
Thank you for this opportunity for Presbyterians across the country to weigh in on this crucial matter. It is my prayer that God will bless you with all wisdom as you sort through the controversial issues at hand. This must be a mammoth task to undertake given the times in our denomination. It is also my prayer that you will approach your task with an unwavering commitment to the truth of Holy Scripture.
As Reformed Christians, the Scriptures are our sole authority in all matters of faith and practice. That is why I urge you to reject the place of “covenanted” same-gender partnerships in the Christian community.
As I understand the description of your work, you will be studying whether or not these unions are consistent with our confessional tradition. Our tradition is quite clear that homosexual practice of any kind is outside the bounds of God’s will.
Those who say otherwise are hard-pressed to find a historical precedent, and they certainly have no Scriptural precedent. For 2,000 years of church history, Christians have rejected homosexual practice as sin. We are a historical, confessional tradition rooted in the rich history of the one holy Catholic Church. As Presbyterians, we are the church reformed always reforming, but we reform solely on the basis of Scripture.
Homosexual relationships of any kind, whether recognized by the state or not, are forbidden in Scripture. Whether the partnership is a “marriage” or a civil union, it must not be condoned in the church. Like Jesus, we are to love people as they are, but this does not mean that we affirm an unscriptural lifestyle.
Those wishing to change our ordination standards or lead us to be “open and affirming” of homosexual partnerships have no historical “leg to stand on.” Even our Book of Confessions speaks to the issue in unequivocal terms. The Heidelberg Catechism condemns “homosexual perversion” (4.087). Of course, this is the phrase that some wish t
o delete from the constitution because of so-called translation inaccuracies.
This is actually just another Trojan horse disguised as an appeal to historical accuracy, when in reality it is simply pushing the agenda of the open and affirming crowd. The 16th century reformers undoubtedly included homosexuality among other sexual sins.
Some may argue that the PCUSA needs to welcome homosexual partnerships in order to be relevant to today’s culture. I would remind them that the Bible is the only relevant authority and that it determines what is relevant in the church, not secular culture.
Some may also say that if we are to stop the PCUSA’s membership decline, then we must change traditional standards. On the contrary, I believe our membership rolls will increase with an unyielding commitment to Biblical truth rather than the compromising of it. Disobedience to Scripture will continue to remove God’s blessing from us, and I believe the decline will become worse. Others say this is a social justice issue. It is really an issue of sin and deception.
I am committed to remaining in the PCUSA and to work for a new Reformation within it. However, that reformation will be dictated by Scripture alone. Indeed, those of us committed to renewal must reverse these trends to ignore scriptural standards and 2,000 years of Christian witness.
Again, I strongly urge you to reject any stance that affirms same-gender partnerships within the PCUSA. There is too much tradition and truth at stake. The unity of this already broken denomination would be further damaged and closer to a permanent schism.
Grace and peace,
Kent Pettit, pastor
First Presbyterian Church of Douglas, Ga.
Christian theology needs to be tempered with a pragmatic realism
Posted Tuesday, Aug. 4, 2009
Members of the Committee,
It is a Christian obligation to acknowledge, affirm, welcome and create an environment in which the love between two persons, regardless of sexual identity or preference, is fully invited and held to a high standard of mutual obligation between partners. I believe this because those who have struggled within the closet often cannot receive the love of God and proclaim it until they emerge as the person that God has intended them to be.
The closet is not a euphemistic metaphor to which we can casually refer in some derogatory or humorous manner. The closet is a prison cell that society has constructed for those who are not heterosexual. Yet as the witness of countless persons who have struggled within the closet and emerged alive attests, it was Christ who released their soul from captivity, and it was only out of the closet that Christ could fully be received. For it is the emergence of the person from out of the closet that attests to the power of the Gospel to liberate the lonely, the oppressed, the outcast and the sinner to a new life in Christ irrespective of sexual identity.
Christian theology needs to be tempered with a pragmatic realism that understands one consistent feature in the map of Christian history: Its functional social mutability. How Christian theology and Scripture functions among people is constrained by the cultural boundaries a given society constructs. In this regard the notion of sin is a socially constructed understanding of Biblical rules and mandates for conduct. What we truly believe to be absolute sin today is not the same as it was ages ago, regardless in some cases of what Scripture actually says. The meaning of Scripture mutates with each culture and civilization as different peoples construct different meanings of the text to communicate and reveal the risen Christ in their midst.
Many who claim authoritative interpretations of Scripture maintain that women ought not hold offices of teaching men theology or holding any position of authority over men in the church or in the home. Women are commanded by God to inhabit specific social roles. The social equality of women in the West is a recent development after centuries of what we now assert were poor interpretations of the role of women as revealed in Scripture. That women have a vital function in the ministry and can indeed hold offices of authority over men in theological matters is far more normative than ever and will continue to be more normative with succeeding generations. This is certainly the case within the PCUSA. The same discussions about the role of women, slaves and people of color have taken place within the PCUSA as we are now discussing concerning homosexuality. We need to observe this from a rational perspective lest we fold into some irrational progressivism where we simply assume that our age is more enlightened than previous ages.
One reading is to assert what Paul or Jesus would have said in our current context. Such assertions inevitably take the shape of whoever is doing the arguing for a given position. As one assertion runs, Paul would have not supported even benevolent slavery today. However it is quite clear from the text that benevolent slavery was something he with Jesus most likely accepted. Such a supposed trajectory does not change the fact that there is good reason to believe that Paul supported an owner’s authority over a slave who works for no wage at all other than a forced exchange of shelter and food. This sort of authoritarian situation does not justify benevolence no matter how familial it is rendered. Most sovereign states have laws that are binding to prevent this sort of economic exchange. Yet many Christian traditions, PCUSA notwithstanding, would oppose a repeal of slavery laws or the equal treatment of women or people of other races on moral grounds rooted in Scripture – the same Scripture that once justified slavery. This is reasoned through how a particular social structure mediates what it believes to be the revealed Word in Scripture for them at a given moment in time.
The point is that we make assumptions on how we read these texts based on variability of contextual matters. I have been on several sides of the debate regarding those in relationships other than traditional, monogamous, heterosexual relationships and the turning point was not in how I understood sin, but in how I understood love and what healthy and up-building relatedness looks like. Our society and psychology mediate our relatedness to God in often intractable ways. We can only relate to God through the media of our experience with the world. If we regulate behaviors in ways that reinforce disordered relationships between non-heterosexuals such as forbidding marriage among other things, our systems of purity and social constructs function as media that will inevitably reinforce disordered relationships with God, or altogether kill off any such possibility. Sin as something prohibitive of behavior is not the issue as much as what kind of relationships serve to mediate the ability of one to receive what is good from God and what relationships fail in that capacity. The assertion that all same gendered relationships are inherently disordered is at stake.
Can a non-heterosexual couple receive the love of Christ in their relationship more fully than outside that relationship? The evidence from same-gender relationships tells us that we should affirm this claim and reject that same-gender relationships are inherently disordered. It is clear that any form of slavery is unjust and ultimately dehumanizing; and women in places of theological and Biblical authority over men is up-building and not destructive to the church. Likewise we are obligated to affirm where the love of Christ is being revealed, experienced, expressed and witnessed among those who happen to have found Him in a place that the church currently rejects as legitimate. Not to respond to this revelation of Christ is to grieve the same Spirit that gives life to the church universal.
<
br />Andrew Tatusko, M.Div., Th.M.
Duncansville, Pa.
Committee’s ultimate answer should be found in the teachings of the Bible
Posted Tuesday, Aug. 4, 2009
Dear Committee members:
In words less eloquent than the responses that have preceded mine, I would like to add a strong “Nay” to any civil union or Christian marriage between participants of the same sex in the Presbyterian Church. We should neither approve, participate in, or condone this action.
The rational of this opinion has been recorded in detail in several preceding responses that I have read. Included are the Biblical definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman, the teachings of both the Old Testament and New Testament against the homosexual behavior, our constitution and confessions, including the Westminster Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and more.
To endorse this action is to give the stamp of approval to homosexual lifestyle by the Presbyterian Church. Not only would this sinful lifestyle be endorsed for those currently involved, but far worse, the church’s endorsement would lessen the stigma so that others may be influenced or recruited into homosexuality. If the authority of the church says OK to the homosexual lifestyle, that removes a major obstacle from the mind of those who are restrained by their conscious or morality. The dogma of: “If it feels good, do it” has claimed another convert.
The Bible is very explicit that whoever leads or encourages another to sin will suffer the consequences. I believe the analogy was “like a mill stone around the neck.” Our church leaders will be culpable if they approve this action.
The committee’s ultimate answer to this question should be found in the teachings of the Bible and in prayer. This question and others of similar nature should be laid to rest. This reoccurring focus on sex is detrimental to the mission of the church and has been disastrous to PCUSA.
The voice of PCUSA is heard loud and clear. Past decisions have resulted in a continuing mass exodus from the rolls of PCUSA. Resources are drained that could best be used elsewhere.
Even church leaders in Africa and Korea have viewed the proposals and actions of the PCUSA with dismay.
The search for peace and unity is not to be found by returning to this topic repeatedly.
Hugh Tate Ervin Jr., elder
First Presbyterian Church, Morganton, N.C.
There is not a polemic against what we know today as same-gender loving couples
Posted Tuesday, Aug. 4, 2009
There are many within the church who choose to restrict the conversation of marriage equality to those of opposite genders. But does not such a conversation neglect our other Presbyterian commitments to universal equality, human rights, and the preservation of justice?
While the PCUSA has not voted to approve the celebration of same-gender loving marriage rites, we have allowed pastors and congregations to perform and host holy-unions. At the same time, we have reiterated our call for the church to preserve the full access to civil rights for every LGBTQ person. Technically, for us marriage is not a sacrament. In performing marriages, our ministers witness the vows of the two people marrying one another and then offer God’s blessing on their union.
Ironically, what we are now seeing in many American states is the recognition of civil unions for all as a form of preserving equal rights for each of their citizens, even though the federal government does not now recognize such rights because of the Defense of Marriage Act. While many in the church are discussing this issue as a marriage issue, what is missing in our ecclesiastical conversations is the inequity between the many human rights and tax breaks given to heterosexual couples that same-gender loving couples do not enjoy. What of the immigration rights of partners of the same-gender? Should people have to be married to be guaranteed health insurance and inheritance rights? Should not every American be able to live their lives free of discrimination and hate-crimes?
Right now a state proposition collecting signatures in California will allow the state to only recognize civil unions – restricting the term “marriage” to the arena of the churches. This would effectively move the “Gay Marriage” debate to religious institutions. While this proposition would bring about civil equality between heterosexual couples and homosexual couples, if this proposition passes it will mean that the LGBTQ community will then ask “Which religious communities will recognize the full humanity of all of its members and which will not?” Are we ready to turn away a whole class of people from our churches?
Marriage is usually discussed in both the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures in the context of patriarchal, polygamous relationships. There is also a polemic in such Scriptures against such marriage relationships with a progressive display of the struggles between the wives of such relationships (i.e., Sarah and Hagar, etc.). The prophet Hosea uses the metaphor of marriage fidelity as an example of the nation of Israel’s lack of fidelity, and the lengths God goes to redeem his beloved. As such, even Jesus’ discussion of marriage and divorce is spoken in the context of marriage between one man and multiple women.
Nevertheless, when we modern Christians hear such texts, we usually read into the text our own monogamous cultural values. Therefore, when the Confessions and the Book of Order speak of marriage as a monogamous institution, they do so with an unBiblical polemic against plural marriage that universalizes the European cultural norm of heterosexual monogamy. However, in all three contexts, marriage is presented in the context of covenant faithfulness. Those who make covenants are expected to remain faithful to those covenants. And, when in our human weakness we break covenant, God is faithful to restore us to faithfulness in love. Such covenants are to be fraught with love – luring us into our best selves.
While the Scriptures do include a polemic against the idolatry of the temple prostitution popular among the foreign nations (Lev. and Romans), there is not a polemic against what we know today as same-gender loving couples because it was unheard of. The modern word “homosexual” has been anachronistically imported into the RSV English translation, which is why we have a task force looking at creating a more faithful version of the Heidelberg Catechism that doesn’t import our modern biases into our historic confessions. As believers who have made peace between religion and science, we will need to include our best human knowledge from both a social-scientific and scriptural perspective. Remember, that any “natural argument” effectively becomes an argument from and for our cultural norms.
Jesus had some strong words about marriage and divorce, protecting the partner who was most at risk of being uncared for in a divorce during his era. I would contend that the real issue remains “covenant fidelity” – do we keep our promises. Since it is clear that same-gender loving couples are as able to live in covenant fidelity as heterosexual couples, the question will eventually move from the state’s rights arena into the church: Will the Presbyterian Church recognize the covenants of every believing couple who desire to live in covenant fidelity? Will we recognize the Spirit’s presence in the lives of all of our baptized church members who desire to be treated equally within their faith communities? Or, will we insist that the friends and family of our LGBTQ members make the impossible choice between their children or their church? When we will begin to live out our Christian discipleship as a function
of Christ’s love, rather than as a function of the culture wars at this particular time in the U.S.?
Today, our only hope is to repent from our collective misrepresentation of sexual minorities and reclaim those parts of our tradition that welcome all. Perhaps we need to reclaim Isaiah’s “House of Prayer for all Peoples” which included those priests who were made eunuchs in the courts of Babylon, and recognize Philip’s preaching to the Ethiopian eunuch whom the Spirit of God fell upon and he could not refuse baptism. It is time to separate ourselves from those hermeneutics that have oppressed those least understood by our society, and to reclaim an ethic of covenant faithfulness that includes who have stood firm within Christ’s covenant even though we have not stood firm with them.
Rev. Will McGarvey, pastor
Community Presbyterian Church, Pittsburg, Calif.
PCUSA can stand by Biblical truth and still love those who don’t believe the same
Posted Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
I will tell you that this entire discussion saddens me. No matter what the results are, some of our brothers and sisters will feel harmed by the decision. Some will fight for what they believe is a right to marriage and against what they think is an injustice created by the church. Others will fight for what they believe is the Biblical truth. In that end, we can’t have it both ways.
Given that, I will start by saying I don’t think there is any question that the Bible teaches us that marriage is between a man and a woman. No matter what term we use, it’s all the same. If you simply change the term to civil unions, it is still suppose to be a marriage in every way as God has created it. So, how can we say anything except what we are led by God to say, through the Bible and that is that marriage is simply between a man and a woman and all other pretenses are false.
The next question is how do we help our brothers and sisters from both sides of this issue? There will be anger, pain and disgust by many. We do it through inclusion, through love and through grace. We open our doors to everyone, without judgment and say to everyone that we are called by God to serve you. We say that we are called by God to love you. We say to each and every person regardless of their position that we all sinners, but we must strive everyday to live up to the example and commands that Christ has given us, through his life and through the Bible.
From a personal note, I will tell you that one of the most wonderful people that I have ever met in my life was my Aunt Barber. Though she was gay, I loved her with all my heart and she loved me just as much. I tell you this because she knew that I didn’t agree with gay marriage, but she also knew that I would never judge her. As she was on her last days on this earth, I had the honor of sitting with her and holding her hand. I will never forget the words she said to me. “Dale, for all these years you have stood by me, when everyone else turned away from me. That is the greatest gift that God could ever give another person. Pure love, by the grace of God.” Several days later she passed away. I have tried to never forget the importance that love and grace must play in all of our lives and how we treat each other.
I believe that our denomination can stand by what we know is the Biblical truth and still love those who don’t believe the same. We should say with one voice that we are led by God and His Word. That marriage is only between a man and a woman, but because we are led by God in everything we do, without judgment, we will love our brothers and sisters regardless of their view and stand by them with that love.
Dale Dempsey, elder
Church of the Redeemer Snellville, Ga.
Civil unions belong to the state. Marriage belongs to the church
Posted Monday, July 27, 2009
Dear Friends and fellow Presbyterians,
This letter contains my counsel to you in dealing with a thorny issue which has plagued our denomination for too many years. It is gradually destroying us and needs to be dealt with and put to rest.
Our country is the product of God fearing people. Our Constitution with its Bill of Rights is the product of our God fearing founders, many of whom were reformed Christians. Our PCUSA Book of Order closely parallels our civil constitution.
Many of my friends believe we now live in a post Christian nation. Our heritage and laws, interpreted by the various Supreme Court ruling generally still reflect our common Biblical background.
The problems and opportunities lie in our belief that our laws should protect and promote our faith origin. One of the conflicts lies in the separation of church and state and how that has evolved during the 20th century. Another involves our commitment to “freedom” and “equality.”
From a civil equality standpoint, I believe that committed couples whether hetero or homo should enjoy the same protection under the civil laws. This right of joint equality is not spelled out in our constitution but seems acceptable to me and certainly reflects our Biblical origin. Thus I have no argument with same sex civil unions that are recognized by the state.
On the other hand, marriage is a religious institution. Our “freedom and equality” must be defined by our historic reformed Biblical belief system. Freedom to relate and behave in the church is on a higher and spiritual level than the civil laws. The word “marriage” is one imbedded in the Christian faith and the church. Husband and wife are religious terms whereas “partner” is a civil term. Biblical marriage is specifically reserved for a permanent one man and one woman relationships blessed by the church. It is one of the Holy Sacraments and not to be altered or defined by the society in which the church dwells. Historically, marriage, by definition is “Christian.” It should be kept that way.
I therefore believe that we can and should support same sex civil unions and also heterosexual marriage. Each should be recognized by the civil laws as providing identical equality under the civil law.
The church however must distinguish its self as set apart from the civil laws and society in general: We are a “called out” people.
The church must speak to society, not listen to it when it comes to matters of faith.
Therefore marriage, remembering that this implies Christian marriage, must be treated differently from civil unions within our denominational polity.
Ministers must not confuse the two and the church must define these two terms as clearly separate. If our union is to survive, we must put finality to this contentious problem.
Ministers must not be allowed to perform civil unions or allow our sanctuaries to be used for civil unions. Let the justices of the peace do their work in the civil courthouse. This is the responsibility of the state. The church currently does not and must not in the future equate a same sex civil union to a heterosexual (Christian) marriage
Ministers must be authorized by the church to perform only heterosexual marriages.
“Give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and give to God, that which is God’s.” Civil unions belong to the state. Marriage belongs exclusively to the church, the body of Christ.
John Buckingham MD MPH MBS
Professor of Family Medicine
Presbyterians should never attempt to approve what God condemns
Posted Monday, July 27, 2009
Dear friends on the committee,
Thank you for your time and thought given to an important issue
in our culture today. And thank you for the opportunity to address the issue. You have asked for input on the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. This is my considered response.
When approaching such matters, we need to ask several questions, such as:
- What counsel has God given us through Scripture? Carefully studying the Word, one finds absolutely no approval given for sexual practice outside the marriage of a man and a woman. I chafed against that ethic as a teen and young adult, when I certainly would have enjoyed an “anything goes” morality, and yet I abided by God’s Word. As a married man, I still must check an animal impulse to be indiscriminately sexual with various women. And I do hold that impulse at bay, because God’s will as found in God’s Word demands it. In Scripture, homosexual practice is never permitted and always condemned. Thus, Presbyterians should never attempt to approve what God condemns – or to encourage, promote, benignly allow or make provisions for sexual sin.
- What is the good and right thing to do? In any situation, there are many possible responses. We people of the Word must discern and then do what is the good and right response. We humans do not declare what is good. It would be a moral disaster if “good” were to be determined as whatever we want it to be at the time. Or if “good” were what most people are doing now. Or if “good” were what is least difficult. For Christians, good is what God declares it to be – even if we in our limited abilities fail to understand exactly why what God says is good is supremely good. We are being told nowadays that “good” is permissive, as if it is “good” to let people do whatever they choose to do and not to question their choices. That is a gross error, the product of a fallen mindset. It is not God’s way! Presbyterians should not conform their moral practices and counsel to a fallen and sinful world, but should be heralding God’s goodness in a countercultural way that runs against a false and harmful streak in society. It is good to obey God, not to rewrite godly morality to approve what God has condemned.
- What is the loving thing to do? Again, Christians are being led to confuse bland permissiveness with love. The truly loving thing to do is what God has called us to do. God’s laws are not arbitrary. God’s commands direct us toward what is ultimately most healthy and beneficial for ourselves and others, as well as what ultimately glorifies God. We do not love others when we act as if we don’t care that they are hurting themselves, hurting others, and grieving God through their contrary sexual pursuits. We do not love others by setting up faux “covenants” so that they may feel confident and encouraged to continue in sexual sin. We do not love others by failing to warn them about the consequences of their actions, but instead just let them continue in sin to their own destruction. For us to display such laissez-faire attitudes and actions would be negligent, not loving! The loving thing to do is to tell God’s truth, to set appropriate boundaries, and to discourage violations of God’s law in every way possible. The truly loving thing is the difficult thing in today’s world: lovingly saying no.
With these three questions in mind, I urge your committee to be scrupulously Biblical in your work. Presbyterians don’t need more secular sociologists or political activists trying to twist Scripture like a putty nose to misdirect the life of the church. We need courageous people of God who abide by God’s Word to speak a clear and compelling word to our denomination, that we firmly choose to follow God’s way and not the ways of the world, that we will live with the values of the Age to Come, and not the fallen mores of this age.
Please, do not make provision for sin by appearing to justify the same-sex sexual activity that would be integral to so-called covenanted same-sex partnerships. In love for others and in faithfulness to God, we need to discourage sin, not provide false cover for it.
Please, do address the need for helping those caught in the anarchy of sexual relationships, which is a symptom of our alienation from God, our neighbor, and ourselves. Persons with homosexual inclinations have an achingly difficult path of discipleship and faithfulness. While those with heterosexual affections must discipline their sexual urges to be expressed only within a marriage relationship, those with homosexual affections must never express them. In a sex-saturated society, such godly discipline is all the harder. It is harder yet if respected voices fail to support the discipline and if no one walks beside the strugglers to offer strength and prayer.
Presbyterians must do more than simply say “No homosexual sex!” – which we must say to be faithful to our God. We must also stand beside our brothers and sisters who struggle with same-sex attractions, offering them nonsexual friendships, honoring their achievements in remaining chaste, praying for them, providing encouragement and accountability in their discipleship, and just generally struggling beside them in their quest to be faithful to God by refraining from falling into practices that God condemns.
It would be a tragedy if the outcome of your committee’s work were to be an official statement that basically would say to our homosexual brothers and sisters, “Go and sin some more.” Instead, we would be well-served if you supply what God has said, what is right and good, and what is truly loving.
James D. Berkley, minister of Word and sacrament
Bellevue, Wash.
No wiggle room: We can’t call same-sex unions ‘marriage’
Posted Monday, July 27, 2009
Dear Committee members:
I’ve read some of the responses already sent to you, and many of the respondents have already done a fine job of summarizing what God has said in His word on the subject. In reviewing Scripture from both the Old and New Testaments, there is really no way to make a case that sexual relations between people of the same gender is ever okay with God. So – sin is sin, and we are all guilty of something – if not something as overt and “in-your-face” as unrepentant homosexual behavior, then perhaps the sin of self-righteousness, judgment or pride for judging those who do. At any rate, there really is no wiggle room that could suggest going the next step and condoning same-sex unions by calling them ‘marriage’ should even be considered.
Rather, we need to embrace our responsibility to bring healing to all people who suffer from the effects of sin in their lives. I used to believe that homosexuality was a condition people were born with, like having brown hair or being tall. I read a wonderful book that opened my eyes to the truth, and since then have known of many people who’ve been healed of this condition and restored to a place of purity and holiness before God. What an amazing God of grace – He heals us if we ask Him!
I know that each of you takes the responsibility of serving on this committee very seriously. And I also know that a great deal of time and effort must be invested to thoroughly review all available resources on this subject. I urge you to please take a small part of that time and read chapter 19 of the book by Doris M. Wagner entitled How to Minister Freedom. Chapter 19, entitled “Freedom from Homosexual Confusion” was written by a man named David Foster, who was a practicing homosexual for many years.
My heart ached as he related his story of the besetting sin that had taken hold of his life, but then the overwhelming mercy of God that brought him back. A brief quotation:
“In the revelation of His grace, as He forgives me again and again and again, my heart has been transformed and knit to His
. I no longer see Him as an adversary. I see Him as love. And that revelation has struck a mighty blow against the rebellion that used to reign in my heart. He has taught me how to put to death that which feeds the old broken self, and how to feed and nurture the new creation that I have been made by Christ. In doing so, the heterosexuality that had always lain dormant within me was finally able to blossom and take its place as my true identity.”
Rather than working to create a construct to make a life of sin a bit more comfortable, let’s be part of the solution and encourage anyone whose sexual identity is being distorted to find freedom in Jesus Christ!
Carol Kessler
PLC executives offer input to marriage, civil union committee
Posted Thursday, July 23, 2009
Sisters and Brothers in Christ,
Thank you for inviting members of the body of Christ to give input to your committee’s work.
You have requested comment on the question of the place of covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. Your request presupposes that same-gender sexual relationships can be covenanted. We contend that the only covenanted relationship ordained by God in which sexual intimacy is appropriately expressed is the marriage of one man and one woman. Our response will first address the biblical definition of “Christian community” and then address “civil unions and marriage.”
Defining ‘Christian community’
The Bible, The Book of Confessions and The Book of Order affirm the following truths:
- The Church was created by, for and belongs to Jesus Christ. According to Jesus, His Church is composed of those whom he has chosen, who confess that He is the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God.[i]
- The Church is the Body of Christ. It finds its life in Him. Therefore it cannot endorse forms of life or manners of living that are contrary to His character or intentions. As the Body of Christ, the unity of the Church matters, and as the Bride of Christ, the purity of the Church matters.[ii]
- The Church is blessed with the gift of God’s Holy Spirit and the Word of God revealed in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. By the power of the Holy Spirit, the Church can discern the mind of Christ when she submits herself to the authority of God’s Word written. Under no circumstances do the Word of God Incarnate and the Word of God Written contradict one another.[iii]
- Christians experience genuine community in the Church where there is an authentic unity of the Spirit which produces the bond of peace.[iv]
Civil unions and marriage
The Word of God, which is the Church’s final authority in matters of faith and life, speaks clearly about marriage and sexual relationships. Submitting ourselves to the authority of God and seeking by the Spirit to discern the mind of Christ through an examination of the Bible, we find no warrant for the inclusion of same-gender civil unions in the Christian community, the Church of Jesus Christ.
God created us male and female. He gave us marriage, a complementary union in which each may be to the other a strength in need, a counselor in perplexity, and a companion in joy. God gave us marriage for the full expression of love, for the birth and nurture of children, and for the well-being of society. And God gave us marriage as a sign that points to the reality of Christ’s union with the Church, a holy mystery.
Jesus announced his blessing upon the institution of marriage by celebrating the wedding at Cana and by quoting the Old Testament proclamation that “From the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. They are no longer two but one, and what God has joined together, no one should seek to separate.”[v]
Marriage, therefore, is not our design; it is God’s design. Let us not presume to redefine, re-imagine, or re-engineer this covenantal union that was instituted by God, blessed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and is sustained by the power of the Holy Spirit. The role of the Church is to transform culture towards God’s plan for humanity, not to be conformed to the culture of the day.[vi] The Church must pastorally minister to all those who find themselves in conflict with God’s revealed design, including persons who engage in homosexual behavior. In this regard, we encourage your committee to examine thoroughly the biblically faithful resources that have been produced by the ministry of OnebyOne.
Let marriage be held in honor among us, and let us always rely on God’s Word as the final authority over our life and work.
The Presbyterian Lay Committee
Carmen S. Fowler
President and Executive Editor
Stephen G. Brown
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Endnotes
[i] The Book of Order G-1.0100 (b)
[ii] The Book of Order G-1.0100 (c)
[iii] Westminster Confession of Faith 6.010
[iv] Ephesians 4:1-16
[v] Mark 10:6-9
[vi] Romans 12:1-2
Stop wasting time, funds with debate
Posted Tuesday, July 21, 2009
I believe that “covenanted same-gender partnerships” have no place in the Christian community. And I’m getting tired of constantly answering the question. It is so self-evident to me that no honest reading of the Bible can condone marriage between homosexuals that I cannot understand why the issue continually absorbs our denomination’s leadership. The practice is contrary to Scripture and our constitution. Period.
In a service of Christian marriage a lifelong commitment is made by a woman and a man to each other, publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith. That’s it. That’s what God intends for us, and no creeping pressure for acceptance by gays should take our eye off the ball of what we’re called to do – and not to do – as Christians.
The pressure being brought by gay activists in the political realm should not dull our understanding of these truths and cause us to waste valuable resources debating an issue that is so obviously settled by the words of the Bible. I need not remind you that many other problems affect our denomination and cause it to hemorrhage members each year. The numbers are disappointing, to say the least.
Nevertheless, I cannot resist pointing out that constantly rehashing this debate does absolutely nothing to help stem the losses. Gays and free-thinkers you might think will be attracted by our sudden “reimagining” of the Bible’s proscriptions on homosexual unions will not flock to our pews. Likewise, no flood of new congregants will sprint to our doors following even a final, definitive, full-throated confession of our intention to be faithful to God’s word and reject the propriety of gay marriage. I submit to you that it is this constant re-argument that most depresses membership. PCUSA’s leadership cannot let it go. And potential parishioners see a confused, dizzy denomination at war with itself and trying to log-roll a change to a very basic matter.
That said, some interesting questions emerge for our churches in states that have, at least for the moment, approved same-sex marriages, whether by legislation or by judicial fiat. What do they do in Vermont or New Hampshire churches when two “married” gay men join the church and want to take part in “couple’s dinners” and marriage counseling, etc? How do we love these people as Christians while rejecting what they think is a legitimate union? Do we just ignore it? Do we take them aside and tell them to keep that “marriag
e stuff” on the down-low on Sundays? What is our duty to them as sinning Christians different from our duty to the rest of us as sinning Christians?
I don’t have a complete answer, but in general I believe that we remind them that the Bible does not condone their behavior, any more than it condones adultery. We continue to hate the sin and love the sinner. And we donate the money that we waste debating this issue into groups like Love Won Out that seek to help homosexuals that want to abandon that lifestyle.
Thanks for reading my thoughts.
Joseph R. Duffus
Gainesville, Va.
PCUSA must wake up, seek forgiveness
Posted Monday, July 20, 2009
I am an ordained Elder and Deacon, current Clerk of Session and an Elder member of our Presbytery Committee on Ministry (COM). I teach the Bethel series and a class on “Faith Fundamentals.” I also have worked with Presbyterian Reformed Ministries International (PRMI) teaching on the person and work of the Holy Spirit with the Dunamis Project. I offer this background only to try to show some degree of intellectual and, I pray, spiritual competence.
It is incredulous to me that our denomination has, I believe, chosen to abandon scriptural teachings about human sexuality and how God has designed us to relate to Him and to one another. There are ample passages of Scripture both in the Old and New Testaments in which God has clearly told us that He abhors the abominable acts of people of the same sex having sexual relations. Those who would have us believe that the love stressed by our Lord Jesus during His ministry has somehow overshadowed or negated the Biblical admonition against such relations are giving short shrift to the Word and its message to us. In my pursuit of Scriptural understanding, I have read several seminary texts on theology and on the origins and sources of the Codices of the Bible. I have tried to keep an open mind, yet have only had my early understanding reinforced as I do more research and delve deeper into the Word and prayer. It is easy to rationalize one’s desires to emphasize one area that may seem attractive to one’s persuasions or to de-emphasize or even deny the legitimacy of other areas in an attempt to justify one’s passions. We do not have a right to use a redacting pen on the written Word of Our Lord. He has told us that we were created in His image. This statement has been interpreted often, and I believe accurately, to mean that He knows our passions, our weaknesses, our strengths, and every facet of our beings, yet He tells us the only proper relations are between one man and one woman. We are aliens in a perverted world. We are to be “in the world, but not of the world.” We are Christians who have been told that having seen Jesus, the Christ, we have seen the Father. Christ was exposed to all the same passions we are and yet resisted. As a broken people, we may not be strong enough to be able to withstand the pressures of evil, but we can and should recognize it for what it is. To do otherwise is to succumb to the evil rather than to strive for what is good and righteous.
Nowhere does Scripture tell us Jesus let those he came into contact with “off the hook.” He confronted their sins, revealed their behavior for what it was where He deemed necessary, and chastised them to “go and sin no more.”
To many like me, it appears we are following a similar pattern as that of Israel in Biblical times. We go through periods of reformation and then backslide to the point of debauchery. Have we no memory of God’s way of responding to the sins of Israel (this can be read as our sins)? Are we blind to the way civilizations fall when their moral underpinning fails? It is time for us to repent of our sins and turn back to our God and His ways!
My prayer is that our denomination will wake up to and realize the error of our ways and seek the forgiveness of our God and strive to return to being good servants who are attractive to the world around us because of the joy we reflect in our daily lives and the love we are eager to share with all who would receive it.
If we are to be true to the faith of our fathers, we must not bless same-sex unions or most especially perform “marriages” of persons of the same sex. Instead, we need to be reaching out in love to teach the Holy Word and encourage all to enter the church to find redemption and forgiveness. God has shown us what righteousness is and we must strive to attain it to the best of our ability. It will not be achieved in this life but it must be the unending and laudable goal for which we reach.
In Christ’s service,
Elder Bill Seiden
Community Presbyterian Church, Vacaville, Calif.
Society’s interest in traditional marriage
Posted Thursday, July 16, 2009
As we debate the meaning of marriage, remember these facts:
• Marriage is society’s sanctioning of the relationship between a man and a woman, in order to ensure the future of that society by protecting the children. While sex and love can be components of marriage, they are not the reason why government has a stake in the marriage.
• Gays have always had the same rights as everyone else in society: to marry one person of the opposite sex. When they now claim a “right” to marry, they want a new and different right in addition to the old right.
My father (a life-long Presbyterian) was himself gay, but married my mother because he wanted children. His “friend” was also married for the same reason – they were honest where contemporary gays are not, because they recognized the true meaning of marriage.
In today’s secular society, talk about the “Biblical” meaning of marriage weakens society’s basis for supporting traditional marriage, which is to raise future generations.
Liz Black
Pittsburgh, Pa.
It’s time to be salt and light, not a cafeteria
Posted Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Hello confused committee.
Thank you for requesting my input into the homosexual, civil union debate so you may better understand God’s written word and his plan for us.
My name is Richard Conway, elder at First Morganton, N.C. I was baptized into the Presbyterian Church as an infant. My wife and I were married in the Presbyterian Church. My four children were baptized into the Presbyterian Church as infants. I teach adult Sunday school, I have been on our session, been SS superintendent, and I participate with Presbyterian Men’s groups and am very active within the church as are my wife and children even as they participate in youth Presbytery groups and mission trips. I continue to participate in regular Bible studies over the years. The self-destruction of our church, PCUSA, concerns me greatly. I am convinced that all these problems we are suffering emanate from the top down.
The secular world is in a spiritual collapse and we, the Church, should be leading them to Christ and redemption. We are not here to adopt the dismal woes of the world but to be a bright shining light, a solid, full of salt, shining light. We need to be a rock, not a cafeteria with something for everyone. For thousands of years, God’s Word has been our guide. For me, I believe it was His Word, it is His Word, and will be His Word and that is what we should be offering. Anything less and we are rebelling against the authority of God. If it is important to God, it must be important to us, for it is His will. If it is important to God, but not to us, then we are rebelling against God. Those who rebel against God’s word have decided that they know better than God. That is what is happening in PCUSA and all this homosexual rebelli
on. This is what I see coming from the PCUSA leaders.
We, the Church, must be a beacon, attracting the un-churched and the sinners with the truth, not with partial truths or accommodating truths. Filled with God’s love, we can help those who have strayed and it is our responsibility to lead them to Christ and redemption.
All the same-sex unions are in direct opposition to God’s Word. Those who are supporting their existence are gullible and weak pawns of false profits and Satan himself disguised as the church leaders, the media, the entertainment industry and lost medical professionals painting them as unable to escape their woes. God can overcome all this through us. He is our creator, HHe loves us, He can heal and protect us, if we give ourselves over to Him.
The Church should welcome everyone, in love. We are all sinners and yet we are commanded to be disciples to them all. To come to Christ, they must repent of their sins, not hold them up as their guiding light. Christ is our one and only guiding light.
Society must know that the Church is the strength of a rock when all around us spirituality is faltering on shifting sands. To be a rock, we cannot be wishy-washy, we must not be following the sinking culture but leading it towards Christ.
Civil unions have no place in PCUSA or in any church. We welcome those lost souls and should do all that is in our power to lead them to Christ. Not the other way around.
The church is not a cafeteria where we offer something for everyone. We offer ONE GOD, one Jesus, one Word for everyone. Let the secular world have their civil unions. God has declared that marriage is between one man and one woman. It is the responsibility of the church to lead, not to follow. If we are to follow anything, it is to follow Christ.
I am extremely saddened that you, our supposed leaders, are so confused over God’s written Word. I am angered too that you have shown such a lack of leadership in our church. How are we supposed to respect you in this? How are we supposed to exhibit loyalty to PCUSA? We are not a social club. We are supposed to be the rock, the path to redemption. Stand firm on God’s word, marriage is between one man and one woman, anything else is a sin. The church welcomes sinners as we lead them to a life without sin. It begins when a sinner rejects sin, repents and asks for forgiveness. And we must forgive, with the love of Christ. The key is rejecting sin, not asking or expecting the church to join in the sin.
I challenge you to be the light, be the strength or go home and let those who can be salt and light, lead the way. It is my observation over the years that the world is trying to remove God from our lives and the PCUSA leaders are following right behind in diminishing God’s word and his plans.
In His name,
Richard Conway, elder
First Presbyterian Church, Morganton, N.C.
Same-sex relations never endorsed or condoned in Bible
Posted Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Too often the response of the Christian community to homosexuals has been homophobic leading to an emotional rejection of homosexual people. Our Lord does not regard the sin of homosexuality as the worst sin, but neither does He dismiss it or think lightly of it. Homosexuals are no greater sinners than are heterosexuals in that we all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. The homosexual is our neighbor and is as much a candidate for Christian love as anyone else. I suspect that some of the most caring and supportive individuals I know are homosexuals.
This is not to argue the case for blessing homosexual unions as “covenanted same-gender partnerships” or in any other way. Nor does it argue for the ordination of open, practicing and unrepentant homosexual ministers. Rather it is to initially state that as Christians, whenever homosexuals or any other group are victimized either by unfair civil laws or by humorous mocking, it is our duty to stand alongside the oppressed in their struggle for justice.
With regard to same-gender partnerships or unions, or whatever term one wishes to use, the second chapter of Genesis (specifically 2:18, 21-24) clearly records God’s intent for us as sexual beings. God, the designer created us for relationship and it is only by extreme cynicism can one pretend that there is any doubt that Scripture is unequivocal in its teaching that homosexual behavior is contrary to the law of God.
After He made Adam from the dust of the earth, God did not simply create the perfect companion for Adam with “let there be” as He had created the animals; nor did He scoop up the dust of the earth and breathe life into a new human being. Instead God took a rib from Adam to create Eve. God divided the whole Adam and brought forth man and woman, male and female, a plurality in union. God divided the one into two, so that they might come together again as one into a complementary relationship. Just as God’s plurality brought forth humanity, so humanity’s plurality brings forth its offspring; and thus the family unit, in some way, although not fully, mirrors the image of God.
Clearly homosexuality does not fit into the picture of proper and holy sexuality because the very heart and foundation of homosexual relationships distort the image of God. Such relationships cannot possibly mirror His revelation as a single, complementary union.
Significant too, is the fact that life proceeds as a product and a blessing from heterosexual unions, which cannot possibly come from homosexual unions. We cannot transcend the distinction God made between male and female so that, among other purposes, we humans might participate with Him in the creation of children (Gen. 1:27-28).
The homosexual act is non-procreative, not by accident but in its very constitution. It cannot be a sign of mutual love which, by God’s blessing, is creative and fruitful. Instead, homosexual relations resemble the love of self that is forbidden and falls short of the Christian norm.
Therefore, in light of why God created sexuality, we can see why He condemns homosexual behavior. Because our sexuality is such a precious gift to be shared in relationship, God provided specific guidelines and laws prohibiting homosexual relations for the sake of our own good (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13).
Some try to escape this Old Testament ban against homosexual relations by pointing to such New Testament passages as Mark 7:19 and Acts 10:14-15, which suggest that Christians are no longer subject to the old laws. But that argument ignores Scriptural differentiation between dietary and ceremonial laws (which have been set aside) and ethical law (which is upheld and reiterated in the New Testament, specifically in Mark 7:20-23 and Matthew 5:27-28). Sections of Romans 1 as well as I Corinthians 6:9-10 also show that the Old Testament prohibition against homosexual behavior is not outdated but reiterated.
Others argue that the translation of the word homosexual from the Greek word “arsenokoites” is inaccurate because they say that Paul was not condemning homosexual behavior but a perversion of it in the form of male prostitution. The Greek word “arsenokoites” is derived from two Greek words; “arsen” meaning male and “koite” meaning couch or bed usually with a sexual connotation as in Hebrews 13:4. Thus, the combination of the two terms does not suggest prostitution but sexual contact between two men.
Scripture is clear about what God intends for us as beings created in His image. And theologians from Thomas Aquinas to Karl Barth stress the procreative end of heterosexual intercourse and the “complementarity” of male and female in the imago Deo (image of God).
Sexual relations between two
people of the same gender is never blessed nor condoned in the Bible. Therefore, there is no place for covenanted same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. Rather the role of the Christian church must be to hold fast to the clear teachings of Biblical revelation, which has been confirmed by history while at the same time the church must offer the homosexual the hope and promise of new life in Jesus Christ through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.
Paul A. Tambrino, Ed.D., Ph.D., Minister of Theological Education
Willow Creek Church, PCA, Winter Springs, Fla.
Traditional Presbyterians standards should not be lowered
Posted Monday, July 13, 2009
Following upon suggestions from The Layman Online, I have sent a letter, text below, to the PCUSA’s committee on civil union and Christian marriage.
“Traditional Presbyterians standards, upheld in the Book of Confessions including 9.47, do not now permit, and ought never be lowered to permit, recognition in the PCUSA of individuals involved in GLB sexual relationships, whether or not between committed partners, as qualified to be candidates for ordained office.”
Please note that I did not include in my letter any recommendation that church membership be denied to GLBT people, nor would I ever make such recommendation. The church’s Form of Government provides for inclusiveness of membership: “No persons shall be denied membership because of race, ethnic origin, worldly condition, or any other reason not related to profession of faith. Each member must seek the grace of openness in extending the fellowship of Christ to all persons.”
Karl Landstrom
First Presbyterian Church, Arlington, Va.
‘The message changes us, we do not change the message’
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009
I sent this letter to the GA special committee, since they asked for input:
I strongly oppose any move toward changing the PCUSA’s concept of marriage.
I point not only to Scripture, but to 10,000 years of recorded human culture and history. Marriage – between a man and a woman – has always been recognized as the foundation of the family. This is not only true throughout Christian history, which only goes back 2,000 years, but for Jewish history, going back another 4,000 or 5,000 years before that. Worldwide, the idea of the family unit has always been one of the cornerstones of human culture.
Even in cultures which adopted variants on the structure of marriage, it was always between men and women.
There has never been a time, throughout all of human history, where same-sex marriage was considered. At best, that would have gotten you laughed out of town.
I realize that the activists among us will not give up until the last conservative Christian has left the church in disgust, but I urge you to call a stop to this endless stream of overtures whose only intent is to bend us to their will, and which have been defeated time after time.
A church near us has a slogan: “The message changes us, we do not change the message.”
More than that, I reject Rev. Shuck’s ultimatum (“The following is the bare minimum. To the moderates and liberals on this committee, you must not give in on this.”)
Mike Zorn
Santa Ana, Calif., First Presbyterian Church of Santa Ana
Loving homosexual partnerships are incompatible with God’s created order
Posted Thursday, July 9, 2009
Dear members of the Civil Union and Christian Marriage Committee,
I am a elder in the Presbyterian Church and a member of the First Church, Fremont, Ohio. It is my understanding that covenanted same-gender partnerships have no place in the Christian community. Scripture defines the marriage God instituted in terms of heterosexual monogamy. Scripture envisages no other kind of marriage or sexual intercourse, for God provided no alternative. Any sexual behavior outside of this definition, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is displeasing to God. Thus, there is no doubt that modern loving homosexual partnerships are incompatible with God’s created order. It is not a matter of whether same-sex relationships are as loving and fulfilling as heterosexual relationships, but a matter of obedience to the revealed will of God no matter how painful it is to obey it. It is my prayer that your committee will make this same, reasoned Biblical determination about marriage.
Yours in Christ,
John G. Roush, Ed.D.
Fremont, Ohio
The Bible absolutely confirms marriage is between one man and one woman
Posted Thursday, July 9, 2009
Civil Union and Christian Marriage Committee,
Your study committee should be dismissed and the funds saved donated to the Salvation Army or any other Christian charity.
The Bible clearly and absolutely confirms marriage is between one man and one woman. No further discussion or debate, as the Lord God has spoken.
It is because of these type of studies in the PCUSA that we (my wife and I) are in the process of leaving this denomination after so many years of being a part of it.
Dean Murphy
Wichita, Kan.
A response to the PCUSA’s marriage committee
Posted Wednesday, July 8, 2009
In response to your article requesting folks who wrote an email to the committee on civil unions and marriage to send y’all one too, here ya go!
Dear Members of the Special Committee on Civil Unions and Christian Marriage:
I have been a minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) for 17 years. During my ministry I have officiated at ceremonies for over 100 couples including gay and lesbian couples. I don’t know if I am supposed to call these ceremonies between the same-gender couples marriages or not. They should be marriages in the eyes of the state in which they were performed and in the eyes of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) They certainly were as holy and sacred as any other marriage at which I have had the honor of being an officiant. These couples need the legal protections that marriage offers.
The marriages for gay and lesbian couples are an important part of my ministry of pastoral care. It is an important part of my current congregation’s ministry. To be blunt: It is time for the rest of the church to catch up. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has an opportunity to atone for its sins. It is a sinful organization that discriminates against its LGBT sisters and brothers – its own children.
I have put up with bullies my whole life from the playground to the boardroom. In the playground, gay and lesbian kids (or those perceived as such) are bullied with words (fag, dyke, queer) and too often with fists. In the boardroom clergy who advocate for equality are bullied with threats of reduced pledges, threats to leave the church, threats of church court cases. Sometimes these threats even materialize. The purpose of all of these threats and bullying is to keep gays and lesbians in the closet and to keep allies silent. It is discrimination and it is as ugly now as it has ever been.
The only way to stop bullying is to stand up to it. You as a committee have a chance to do that right now. The church has been bullied for the last 35 years by a right wing intent on controlling the lives of others and spewing hatred by hiding behind a few select verses in the Bible. I don’t know if you have any idea how much pain, how many suicides, how many families have been torn apart by ignorance and fear that comes straight from the pulpit. Here i
s a common story from my neighborhood.
Frankly, I don’t expect much from your committee. You likely will come up with some lame report that tries to pacify the right wing out of a desire for unity. In the meantime, a church that can’t stand up to bullies will continue to allow its own children to be rejected and forced to live as second-class citizens.
Just in case there is a chance that you will do the right thing, here is what you need to do:
Propose that the 2010 General Assembly:
- Allow clergy in the six states (and in any future state) that have legalized same-gender marriage to sign marriage licenses and solemnize these marriages in the church.
- Affirm that clergy may consecrate marriages (in the eyes of the church) for same-gender couples even in those states that have yet to legalize same-gender marriage.
- Change the definition of marriage from one man and one woman to two people in all relevant documents.
- Modify the Directory for Worship to create marriage rites suitable for same-gender couples.
- Advocate for marriage equality throughout the United States.
I doubt you will be able to pull all of that off although you should try.
The following is the bare minimum. To the moderates and liberals on this committee, you must not give in on this. At the very least, you must allow freedom of conscience for clergy and for sessions regarding pastoral care to LGBT people. This includes freedom of conscience regarding all rites and observances regarding marriage.
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Rev. John Shuck, minister
First Presbyterian Church, Elizabethton, Tenn.
PCUSA must become relevant to society
Posted Wednesday, July 8, 2009
I understand the PCUSA has created a committee and charged it with the task of looking at marriage, civil unions and the current issues related to same-gender marriage. They are asking for input from members of the PCUSA on these issues.
I am the office assistant at a PCUSA church. I am straight and have been happily married to my partner for almost 20 years.
I am not a member of the PCUSA. That means that the committee may choose to disregard my comments. So be it. I do want the committee to understand that I will never become a member of the PCUSA as long as it continues to discriminate against others who would like to do as my partner and I have done, but are denied that privilege simply because they are same-gendered.
I understand the church rolls are declining – not just the PCUSA’s, but most other church rolls as well. If the PCUSA wants to change that, it needs to work to become relevant to those who stand outside it. Recognizing, embracing and even encouraging same-gender marriage is a step in the right direction.
Sandra Garrett, office assistant
First Presbyterian Church, Elizabethton, Tenn.